Micro aerial vehicles are currently receiving growing interest because of their broad applications in many fields. In their flight tests, the onset of unwanted large amplitude roll oscillations was reported, which resulted in difficulties with flight control, and this has become one of the major challenges of current micro aerial vehicles design. In this review type of article, the low Reynolds number flow characteristics of a low-aspect-ratio wing are reviewed, and the self-induced roll oscillations are discussed with special attention being payed to the interaction between the three-dimensional flow structure and wing in reciprocatively rolling motion. The roll attenuation methods are introduced via flow control approaches, which can suppress the roll oscillations effectively by manipulating the leading-edge flow separation and tip vortices of the low-aspect-ratio wings.
HassanalianMAbdelkefiA. Classifications, applications, and design challenges of drones: A review. Prog Aerosp Sci2017; 91: 99–131.
2.
Gad-el-HakM. Micro-air-vehicles: Can they be controlled better?J Aircr2001; 38: 419–429.
3.
Mueller TJ and DeLaurier JD. An overview of micro air vehicle aerodynamics. In: Mueller TJ (ed.) Fixed and flapping wing aerodynamics for micro air vehicle applications. Reston, VA: AIAA, 2001.
4.
GursulI. Vortex flows on UAVs: Issues and challenges. Aeronaut J2004; 108: 597–610.
5.
Mueller TJ, Kellogg JC, Ifju PG, et al. Introduction to the design of fixed-wing micro air vehicles: Including three case studies. Reston, VA: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2007.
MuellerTJDeLaurierJD. Aerodynamics of small vehicle. Annu Rev Fluid Mech2003; 35: 89–111.
10.
EarnshawPLawfordJ. Low-speed wind-tunnel experiments on a series of sharp-edged delta wings, London, UK: HM Stationery Office, 1966.
11.
PolhamusEC. Predictions of vortex-lift characteristics by a leading-edge suction analogy. J Aircr1971; 8: 193–199.
12.
Horton HP. Laminar separation bubbles in two and three dimensional incompressible flow. Department of Aeronautical Engineering. PhD Thesis, Queen Mary College London, London, UK, 1968.
13.
LianYShyyW. Laminar-turbulent transition of a low Reynolds number rigid or flexible airfoil. AIAA J2007; 45: 1501–1513.
14.
ChenZJQinNNowakowskiAF. Three-dimensional laminar-seperation bubbles on a cambered thin wing at low Reynolds numbers. J Aircr2013; 50: 152–163.
15.
O’mearaMMMuellerTJ. Laminar separation bubble characteristics on an airfoil at low Reynolds numbers. AIAA J1987; 25: 1033–1041.
16.
FreymuthPFinaishFBankW. Further visualization of combined wing tip and starting vortex systems. AIAA J1987; 25: 1153–1159.
17.
CosynPVierendeelsJ. Numerical investigation of low-aspect-ratio wings at low Reynolds numbers. J Aircr2006; 43: 713–722.
18.
TairaKColoniusT. Three-dimensional flows around low-aspect-ratio flat-plate wings at low Reynolds numbers. J Fluid Mech2009; 623: 187–207.
19.
TairaKColoniusT. Effect of tip vortices in low-Reynolds-number poststall flow control. AIAA J2009; 47: 749–756.
20.
OkamotoMAzumaA. Aerodynamic characteristics at low Reynolds number for wings of various planforms. AIAA J2011; 49: 1135–1150.
21.
YilmazTORockwellD. Flow structure on finite-span wings due to pitch-up motion. J Fluid Mech2012; 691: 518–545.
22.
ChenPWBaiCJWangWC. Experimental and numerical studies of low aspect ratio wing at critical Reynolds number. Eur J Mech B Fluids2016; 59: 161–168.
23.
VisbalMR. Unsteady flow structure and loading of a pitching low-aspect-ratio wing. Phys Rev Fluids2017, pp. 2–2.
ArenaASJNelsonRC. Experimental investigation on limit cycle wing rock of slender wings. J Aircr1994; 31: 1148–1155.
26.
Nguyen LT, Yip L and Chambers JR. Self-induced wing rock of sledner delta wings. In: AIAA atomshperic flight mechanics conference, Albuquerque, NM, 1981.
27.
LevinDKatzJ. Dynamic load measurements with delta wings undergoing self-induced roll oscillations. J Aircr1982; 21: 30–36.
28.
LevinDKatzJ. Self-induced roll oscillations measured on a delta wing/canard configuration. J Aircr1986; 23: 814–819.
29.
EvansC. An investigation of large amplitude wing rock. Aeronaut J1984; 88: 51–57.
30.
EricssonLE. Analytic prediction of the maximum amplitude of slender wing rock. J Aircr1989; 26: 35–39.
31.
Arena ASJ and Nelson RC. A discrete vortex model for predicting wing rock of slender wings. In: AIAA atomspheric flight mechanics conference. Hilton Head Island, SC, 1992.
32.
BadcockKJWoodgateMAAllanMR, et al.Wing-rock limit cycle oscillation prediction based on computational fluid dynamics. J Aircr2008; 45: 954–961.
33.
WangBDengXMaB, et al.Modeling of wing rock using frequency spectrum analysis of free-to-roll time histroy. J Aircr2011; 48: 805–811.
34.
EricssonLE. The fluid mechanics of slender wing rock. J Aircr1984; 21: 322–328.
35.
JunYWNelsonRC. Leading edge vortex dynamics on a delta wing undergoing a wing rock motion. J Aircr1988; 25: 815–819.
EricssonLE. Wing rock of nonslender delta wings. J Aircr2001; 38: 36–41.
38.
Ueno M, Matsuno T and Nakamura Y. Unsteady aerodynamics of rolling thick delta wing with high aspect ratio. In: 16th AIAA applied aerodynamics conference, Albuquerque, NM, 1998.
39.
Matsuno T and Nakamura Y. Self-induced roll oscillation of 45-degree delta wings. In: 38th aerospace sciences meeting and exhibit, Reno, NV, 2000.
40.
McClain A, Wang Z and Gursul I. Unsteady aerodynamics of free-to-roll nonslender delta wings. In: 45th AIAA aerospace sciences meeting and exhibit. Reno, NV, 2007.
41.
GreshamNTWangZGursulI. Vortex dynamics of free-to-roll slender and nonslender delta wings. J Aircr2010; 47: 292–302.
42.
GreshamNTWangZGursulI. Effect of slenderness ratio on free-to-roll wing aerodynamics. J Aircr2011; 48: 1112–1115.
43.
GreshamNTWangZGursulI. Low Reynolds number aerodynamics of free-to-roll low aspect ratio wings. Exp Fluids2010; 49: 11–25.
44.
GreshamNTZhijinWGursulI. Self-induced roll oscillations of nonslender wings. AIAA J2009; 47: 481–483.
45.
GoTHMaqsoodA. Effect of aspect ratio on wing rock at low Reynolds number. Aerosp Sci Technol2015; 42: 267–273.
46.
HuTWangZGursulI. Passive control of self-induced roll oscillations of low-aspect-ratio rectangular wings using bleed. Exp Fluids2014; 55: 1752–1769.
47.
ShieldsMMohseniK. Effects of sideslip on the aerodynamics of low-aspect-ratio low-Reynolds-number wings. AIAA J2012; 50: 85–99.
48.
ShieldsMMohseniK. Roll stall for low-aspect-ratio wings. J Aircr2013; 50: 1060–1069.
49.
LinehanTMohseniK. Leading-edge flow reattachment and the lateral static stability of low-aspect-ratio rectangular wings. Phys Rev Fluids2017, pp. 2–2.
50.
DeVoria AC and Mohseni K. A vortex model for forces and moments on low-aspect-ratio wings in side-slip with experimental validation. Proc Math Phys Eng Sci 2017; 473. DOI: 10.1098/rspa.2016.0760.
51.
Linehan T and Mohseni K. Aerodynamics and lateral stability of low-aspect-ratio wings with dihedral at low Reynolds numbers. In: 54th AIAA aerospace sciences meeting. San Diego, CA, 2016.
52.
Ng TT and Malcolm GN. Aerodynamic control using forebody blowing and suction. In: 29th aerospace sciences meeting, Reno, NV, 1991.
53.
Suarez C, Kramer B and Ayers B. Forebody vortex control for suppressing wing rock on a highly-swept wing configuration. In: AIAA 10th applied aerodynamics conference, Palo Alto, CA, 1992.
54.
WongGSRockSMWoodNJ, et al.Active control of wing rock using tangential leading-edge blowing. J Aircr1994; 31: 659–665.
55.
SreenathaAGOngTK. Wing rock suppression using recessed angle spanwise blowing. J Aircr2002; 39: 900–903.
56.
GreenblattD. Fluidic control of a wing tip vortex. AIAA J2012; 50: 375–387.
57.
Ng TT and Malcolm GN. Aerodynamic control using forebody strakes. In: 29th aerospace sciences meeting, Reno, NV, 1991.
58.
NgTTShaffTKountzJ. Effect of leeward flow dividers on the wing rock of a delta wing. J Aircr1994; 31: 1431–1433.
59.
SynolakisCEBreuelBDTegulapalleM, et al.Passive control of delta wing rock. J Aircr1993; 30: 131–135.
60.
MabeyDG. Similitude relations for buffet and wing rock on delta wings. Prog Aerosp Sci1997; 33: 481–511.
61.
WaltonJKatzJ. Application of leading-edge vortex manipulations to reduce wing rock amplitudes. J Aircr1993; 30: 555–557.
62.
CollinsFGZelenevitzJ. Influence of sound upon separated flow over wings. AIAA J1975; 13: 408–401.
63.
Ahuja KK and Burrin RH. Control of flow seperation by sound. In: AIAA/NASA 9th aeroacoustics conference, Williamsburg, VA, 1984.
64.
ZamanKBMQBar-SeverAMangalamMS. Effect of acoustic excitation on the flow over a low-Re airfoil. J Fluid Mech1987; 182: 127–148.
65.
NishiokaMAsiaMYoshidaS. Control of flow separation by acoustic excitation. AIAA J1990; 28: 1909–1915.
66.
ZamanKBMQMcKinzieDJ. Control of laminar separation over airfoils by acoustic excitation. AIAA J1991; 29: 1075–1083.
67.
ZamanKBMQ. Effect of acoustic excitation on stalled flows over an airfoil. AIAA J1992; 30: 1492–1499.
68.
HsiaoF-BJihJ-JShyuR-N. Effect of acoustics on flow passing a high-AOA airfoil. J Sound Vib1997; 199: 177–188.
69.
HuTWangZGursulI. Attenuation of self-excited roll oscillation of low-aspect-ratio wings by means of acoustic forcing. AIAA J2014; 52: 843–854.
70.
Bar-SeverA. Separation control on an airfoil by periodic forcing. AIAA J1989; 27: 820–821.
71.
SmithBLGlezerA. The formation and evolution of synthetic jets. Phys Fluids1998, pp. 10–10.
72.
SeifertADarabiAWygnanskiI. Delay of airfoil stall by periodic excitation. J Aircr1996; 33: 691–698.
73.
SeifertAEliahuSGreenblattD. Use of piezoelectric actuators for airfoil separation control. AIAA J1998; 36: 1535–1537.
74.
WuJ-ZLuX-YDennyAG, et al.Post-stall flow control on an airfoil by local unsteady forcing. J Fluid Mech1998; 371: 21–58.
75.
AmitayMSmithDRKibensV, et al.Aerodynamic flow control over an unconventional airfoil using synthetic jet actuators. AIAA J2001; 39: 361–370.
76.
GreenblattDWygnanskiIJ. The control of flow separation by periodic excitation. Prog Aerosp Sci2000; 36: 487–545.
77.
AmitayMGlezerA. Role of actuation frequency in controlled flow reattachement over a stalled airfoil. AIAA J2002; 40: 209–216.
78.
GlezerAAmitayMHonohanM. Aspects of low- and high-frequency actuation for aerodynamic flow control. AIAA J2005; 43: 1501–1511.
79.
RullanJMVlachosPPTelionisDP, et al.Post-stall flow control of sharp-edged wings via unsteady blowing. J Aircr2006; 43: 1746–1738.
80.
WhiteheadJGursulI. Interaction of synthetic jet propulsion with airfoil aerodynamics at low Reynolds numbers. AIAA J2006; 44: 1753–1766.
81.
MargarisPGursulI. Wing tip vortex control using synthetic jets. Aeronaut J2006; 110: 673–681.
82.
GursulIWangZ. Flow control of tip/edge vortices. AIAA J2018; 56: 1731–1749.
83.
HuTWangZGursulI, et al.Active control of self-induced roll oscillation of a LAR flat plate wing using synthetic jet. Int J Flow Control2013; 5: 201–214.
84.
Hou T, Cheng C and Hu T. Passive control method in attenuating self-induced roll oscillations of low-aspect-ratio wings using oblique slot bleed. In: 31st congress of the international council of the aeronautical sciences. Belo Horizonte, Brazil, 2018.
85.
O’DonnellRMohseniK. Roll control of low-aspect-ratio wings using articulated winglet control surfaces. J Aircr2019; 56: 419–430.
86.
ShieldsMMohseniK. Passive mitigation of roll stall for low aspect ratio wings. Adv Rob2013; 27: 667–681.
87.
Williams DL and Nelson RC. Fluid-dynamic mechanisms leading to self-induced osicllations of LARR wings. In: 35th aerospace siences meeting & exhibit. Reno, NV, 1997.
88.
EtkinB. Dynamics of flight – Stability and control, Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, 1982.
89.
SchmidtL. Introduction to aircraft flight dynamics, Reston, VA: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 1998.
90.
Shields M and Mohseni K. Roll stability regimes at low Reynolds numbers. In: AIAA guidance, navigation, and control conference, Kissimmee, FL, 2015.
91.
FishFELauderGV. Passive and active flow control by swimming fishes and mammals. Annu Rev Fluid Mech2006; 38: 193–224.
92.
FishFEBattleJM. Hydrodynamic design of the humpback whale flipper. J Morphol1995; 225: 51–60.
93.
FishFELauderGV. Control surfaces of aquatic vertebrates: Active and passive design and function. J Exp Biol2017; 220: 4351–4363.
94.
MiklosovicDSMurrayMMHowleLE, et al.Leading-edge tubercles delay stall on humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae) flippers. Phys Fluids2004; 16: L39–L42.
95.
MiklosovicDSMurrayMMHowleLE. Experimental evaluation of sinusoidal leading edges. J Aircr2007; 44: 1404–1408.
96.
Van NieropEAAlbenSBrennerMP. How bumps on whale flippers delay stall: An aerodynamic model. Phys Rev Lett2008; 100: 054502–054502.
97.
WeberPWHowleLEMurrayMM, et al.Computational evaluation of the performance of lifting surfaces with leading-edge protuberances. J Aircr2011; 48: 591–600.
98.
JohariHHenochCCustodioD, et al.Effects of leading-edge protuberances on airfoil performance. AIAA J2007; 45: 2634–2642.
99.
HansenKLKelsoRMDallyBB. Performance variations of leading-edge tubercles for distinct airfoil profiles. AIAA J2011; 49: 185–194.
100.
CustodioDHenochCWJohariH. Aerodynamic characteristics of finite span wings with leading-edge protuberances. AIAA J2015; 53: 1878–1893.
101.
PostMLDeckerRSapellAR, et al.Effect of bio-inspired sinusoidal leading-edges on wings. Aerosp Sci Technol2018; 81: 128–140.
102.
WeiZNewTHCuiYD. An experimental study on flow separation control of hydrofoils with leading-edge tubercles at low Reynolds number. Ocean Eng2015; 108: 336–349.
103.
Hu T, Liu P and Chen C. Flow control technology for self-induced roll oscillations of low-aspect-ratio wings. In: 1st Chinese aerodynamic conference, Mianyang, China, 2018.
104.
ReesCJC. Form and function in corrugated insect wings. Nature1975; 256: 200–203.
105.
ReesCJC. Aerodynamic properties of an insect wing section and a smooth aerofoil compared. Nature1975; 258: 141–142.
106.
KeselAB. Aerodynamic characteristics of dragonfly wing sections compared with technical aerofoils. J Exp Biol2000; 203: 3125–3135.
107.
Vargas A and Mittal R. Aerodynamic performance of biological airfoils. In: 2nd AIAA flow control conference. Portland, OR, 2004.
VargasAMittalRDongH. A computational study of the aerodynamic performance of a dragonfly wing section in gliding flight. Bioinspiration Biomimetics2008; 3: 26004–26004.
110.
LevyDESeifertA. Simplified dragonfly airfoil aerodynamics at Reynolds numbers below 8000. Phys Fluids2009, pp. 21–21.
111.
MurphyJTHuH. An experimental study of a bio-inspired corrugated airfoil for micro air vehicle applications. Exp Fluids2010; 49: 531–546.
112.
BarnesCJVisbalMR. Numerical exploration of the origin of aerodynamic enhancements in [low-Reynolds number] corrugated airfoils. Phys Fluids2013, pp. 25–25.
113.
NewTHChanYXKohGC, et al.Effects of corrugated aerofoil surface features on flow-separation control. AIAA J2014; 52: 206–211.
114.
Xiao J, Hu T and Liu P. Experiments on self-induced roll attenuation of low-aspect-ratio wings with biomimetic corrugations. In: 11th national conference on experimental fluid dynamics. Tianjing, China, 2019.
115.
CarruthersACThomasALRTaylorGK. Automatic aeroelastic devices in the wings of a steppe eagle Aquila nipalensis. J Exp Biol2007; 210: 4136–4149.
116.
VidelerJJ. Avian flight, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2006.
117.
LeeSIKimJParkH, et al.The function of the alula in avian flight. Sci Rep2015, pp. 5–5.
118.
LinehanTMohseniK. Investigation of a sliding alula for control augmentation of lifting surfaces at high angles of attack. Aerosp Sci Technol2019; 87: 73–88.
119.
WangJJChoiKSFengLH, et al.Recent developments in DBD plasma flow control. Prog Aerosp Sci2013; 62: 52–78.
120.
ShenLWenCYChenHA. Asymmetric flow control on a delta wing with dielectric barrier discharge actuators. AIAA J2016; 54: 652–658.
121.
RaghuS. Fluidic oscillators for flow control. Exp Fluids2013; 54: 1455–1455.
122.
JentzschMTaubertLWygnanskiI. Using sweeping jets to trim and control a tailless aircraft model. AIAA J2019; 57: 2322–2334.
